The Link between Recycling and Litter

Abstract

The purpose of our research was to determine whether residential recycling programs introduced an additional benefit-reduced litter. We evaluated the proposition that such programs should impart to participants a heightened environmental awareness and understanding that may encourage them to litter less and/or pick up more accumulated litter. We examined accumulated litter by various types-recyclable litter, recyclable accessories, and nonrecyclable litter-in selected neighborhoods before and after the implementation of the Baton Rouge, Louisiana, curbside recycling program. We found that recyclable lifter decreased significantly after the onset of the program. However, there was no similar decline in other types of litter. Although participants were motivated to discard fewer recyclables and/or pick up more recyclable litter after Implementation of the program, this behavior did not carry over to the proper disposal of nonrecyclable lifter.

An environmental social marketing intervention among employees: assessing attitude and behaviour change

“…This shows that recycling is responsible for most of the variation in employee's overall behaviour (36.21%). In support of the prior literature, it appears that employees are grouping similar behaviours together (Reams et al, 1996), but in addition to this, they group recycling behaviours based on how common and routine these behaviours are. The two dimensions of recycling behaviour at the workplace, as identified in the factor analysis above, have been considered when testing for significant differences between the groups as a result of the interventions (see testing of H7 below).…”

“…However, caution should be exercised in assuming that the antecedents and concomitants of any particular behaviour are the same or even similar (Tracy & Oskamp, 1983-1984Vinning & Ebreo, 2002;Steg & Vlek, 2009) with factor analysis highlighting that recycling is not strongly related to energy, water conservation (Berger, 1997); and household purchasing behaviour (Ebreo & Vinning, 1994;Linn et al, 1994) for example. Research suggests that generalisation between behaviours might be the case only when the behaviours are closely related (Reams et al, 1996) and that the performance of one pro-environmental behaviour might actually inhibit or reduce the performance of others (Thorgersen, 1999).…”

The Impact of Individual Attitudinal and Organisational Variables on Workplace Environmentally Friendly Behaviours

“…Last, in line with prior research noting that each type of green behavior may be associated with other types of green behaviors (Lee et al, 1995;Reams et al, 1996), only some behaviors were significantly associated with one another. Recycling behaviors were positively and significantly associated with both energy saving and printing reduction behaviors.…”

“…In addition, Lee et al (1995) find that recycling one material does not lead to other recycling and waste management behaviors. However, other studies report a spillover or carryover effect (Vinning and Ebreo, 2002) among types of pro-environmental behaviors (Reams et al, 1996). Regardless of these mixed results, we hypothesize the following:…”

A survey of recycling behaviour in households in Kiruna, Sweden

“…Incineration, although it can be used to recover energy, is more costly than landfills and in addition still produces toxic emissions and hazardous ash, in spite of improving technology. There are also many other benefits associated with recycling, but the major ones are reducing the waste stream destined for landfills or incineration, saving natural resources and energy used in the production of new goods, and lowering pollution levels (Reams & Geaghan 1996). Recycling is important because a long-term nationwide recycling action extends and conserves scarce resources (Hornik & Cherian 1995 ).…”